Forum Topic

I like this game. I'll add by Ward and trying to move east to west. Apologies if I've messed up some ward boundaries. Not sure of all the ages but I think the one in front of the paint shop and cafe only went in around 2005. Homefields WardStamford Brook Avenue / Goldhawk RoadPrebend Gardens one way schemeBritish Grove one way scheme and junction with A4 (60 years?)Netheravon Road and A4 (60?)Airedale Avenue and A4 (60?)Chiswick Mall one way and modal filter with contraflow cycle laneCorrection on your list - Beverley Road / Chiswick LanePumping Station Road / Chiswick Mall -  modal filter for cyclingCranbrook Road one way schemeBrackley Road one way schemeAnnandale Road one way schemeSwanscombe Road one way schemeIngress St one way schemeDevonshire Road one way schemeCleveland Ave and Merton Ave one way schemeFlanders Road / Welstead Way modal filterCorney Road modal filterGrantham Road modal filterPaxton Road one way schemeYou got Thornton Avenue - modal filter at TGTTurnham Green WardYou got Chiswick Common Road - modal filter at TGTLinden Gardens one way schemeDolman Rd one way schemeBennett St and A4Park Road North and A4Chiswick Road one way scheme and modal filter for cyclingGarth Road and A4Sutton Lane North and Sutton Road North one way scheme and modal filter for cyclingHarvard Road and A4Burlington Gardens one way schemeSilver Crescent and Thorney Hedge Road one way schemePrinces Avenue one way schemeRiverside WardRiverview Grove and Grove Park Terrace modal filterCompton Crescent and Sutton Court modal filterBrooks Lane - school street and modal filterSpring Grove one way schemeClarence Road no entry from Wellesley RoadSouthfield WardWoodstock Rd and The Avenue - road closureWadhurst Road and Priory Road - modal filterEvershed Walk and Cleveland Rd - modal filterThat's all I can think of for now but there are probably more. Homefields clearly had some progressive Councillors in the past. Followed by Turnham Green. No wonder Riverside is playing catch up as it suffers from all of the problems that once plagued Homefields.

Paul Campbell ● 1915d

The phrase LTN has only existed since last year, so the oldest LTN is Staveley Road. Everything before that was either a road closure or adapting the horse and cart network. Most of the roads you have listed are part of 3 groups, all of which were to make car ownership and driving better. First there are all the roads cut off by the A4, some were closed when the road was built and have never joined the A4, others were changed later. By inconveniencing a few residents journey times on the A4 are improved. With the threat of closing every side road that connects to the A4 it is clear that it is not for locals to use, but just for people driving through Chiswick. If you offered the residents a choice of reconnecting their roads and having a few more people drive past their front door, or keeping the roads closed and keeping the six lanes of traffic in their gardens, I wonder which would be considered the low traffic option? The second group are changes because of changes to cars. About 30 years ago cars were made safer with airbags, side impact bars and other features that made cars wider. In the 70’s car ownership wasn’t a big problem. By the 80’s households with two cars was becoming a problem but with the width of cars most roads could fit parked cars either side and still fit one car each way. By the 90’s cars were wider creating a problem that hadn’t existed before. Planners had 2 options, lose 50% of the parking and keep the road two way, or keep the parking and make the road one way. Acton Lane, Southfield Road and Sutton Court Road lost 50% of the parking, which improved the traffic. Although car ownership has declined I would guess residents would accept the inconvenience of a one way road, so they can keep 50% of the parking, not just for themselves, but for visitors, tradespeople and deliveries. The third group are changes to the horse and cart network. Woodstock Road, Chiswick Common Road, Beverley Road, Riverview Grove and a few more have been closed to make it better for cars, if these roads were open they have poor sight lines for exiting and would create difficult cross roads. So by causing a minor diversion for a few people, they improve safety for everyone driving and walking. Sorry not my fault planners for the last 110+ never really thought about cyclists. I see that you have finally mentioned Compton Crescent, now you know it exists maybe you could send your wife and child that way instead of sending them on the cycle route google maps suggests. I am surprised you haven’t mentioned the road before as it is the only one on the list that was put in place to stop cars. Unfortunately it wasn’t a forward thinking planner, it was a sensible/cheapskate landowner. Sutton Court is a private road and they didn’t want to pay for the upkeep of the road that other people were using, so they closed it. As you are trying to promote a TFL scheme, I find it odd you should mention Chiswick Lane as it is part of a failed TFL scheme. The plan was to have a bus lane from Hammersmith to Kew Bridge, the section on Kew Bridge was removed. Chiswick Lane to Goldhawk Road had to be completely redesigned. The section from Turnham Green to Chiswick Lane the reason for the closure, was never installed. Hounslow Council asked TFL to put the turning back, but TFL didn’t have the money. I wonder if history is repeating itself.

Colin Potter ● 1908d

"The phrase LTN has only existed since last year.....everything before that was either a road closure or adapting the horse and cart network."Pro LTN people say “look, we’ve had road restrictions for decades, LTNs aren’t new”.Colin argues we haven’t, not just because they weren’t called LTNs (earliest “LTN” I think was 2015 actually), but because their purpose is different.The purpose of an LTN is to reduce traffic via access only vehicle restrictions and thus also air pollution, noise and accidents.  They also encourage modal shift from vehicles to walking/ cycling.  The poster believes that no restrictions pre-2020 aimed to do that.  In fact every single road restriction was done to benefit or accommodate vehicles, whether to improve site lines so they hit less pedestrians, or switched to one way to allow for wider cars and parking.They certainly weren't done to benefit cyclists - indeed, the poster argues no road change since 1910 has even acknowledged the presence of cyclists.  At some point in this alternative history, roads switched from exclusively "horse and cart" and directly to motor cars, which suggests that cycling has never been nor could ever be a viable transport option.  Well, so what if Colin is right about LTNs being a brand new invention?You can argue that the 2020 LTNs were a direct response to a vicious respiratory disease that particularly killed overweight people with asthma - so a modal shift from driving to active travel that improves air quality and fitness was attractive at the time. In mid-2020, a massive modal shift was already underway: from public transport to cars. Congestion reached pre-pandemic levels while many of us were locked down and working from home. TFL modelled a doubling of traffic without intervention once lockdown ended - with a huge impact on air quality and thus COVID death rates, and with no vaccines in sight, dramatic action was required.The poster argues that it should all go back to the way it was - and go further because he believes there is support to reopen many long closed road to prevent rat running to avoid the A4, although he sees that as equitable access to the A4 by local residents.  Should we remove all the LTNs?  What are the arguments to keep them if we now have vaccines and expect people to give up their cars and bikes and get back on buses?The main argument is that they work - they reduce traffic on minor roads (without displacing much), reduce air pollution, reduce accidents and encourage people to cycle or walk.That’s important because pre-pandemic, traffic doubled on minor roads in ten years and air pollution is making us unhealthy and killing circa 40,000 people per year in the UK (about the same number attributed to COVID in 2021 so far).  But there isn’t a vaccine or a cure for air pollution, just prevention, which makes it a harder sell.  No quick jab in the arm, but a small change in behaviour by a very large number of people.Whether the earlier LTNs were really LTNs or not doesn't really matter, but it does demonstrate that road restrictions are quickly forgotten about once people get used to them and "residents would accept the inconvenience" (Colin's words) in return for the benefits.

Ed Saper ● 1907d

It is like the 3 Musketeers, insult one, you insult them all.  I didn’t suggest roads were reconnected to the A4. I was suggesting removing the A4, without six lanes of traffic in the middle of them the roads could be reconnected to each other. I fail to see how cutting a road in half to allow six lanes of traffic can make a road a low traffic area. In my alternative history there were the roads the romans left behind and other local trackways to get around, but these deteriorated and were not much use for traveling long distances with goods. The canals were built carving holes in the landscape to make traveling distances easier. The trains soon followed carving up the landscape more. After the great horse manure crisis that should have been the era for cycling in London, but the car soon dominated. If the car hadn’t become so popular so quickly there may have been more cycling infrastructure built then. Instead we ended up with Sir Abercrombie whose ringway plan was about moving cars and goods long distances quickly and not much for cyclist locally. With almost every road planner after copying from his plan, it is a surprise there is any cycling infrastructure before TFL finally put his plan in the bin. But just as the canals and trains have disappeared the roads will one day do the same when we find a viable alternative.  It was only when motorways were being built in peoples gardens or their houses were being demolished that people realised the car may not be as good as they thought. When I drive on the A34 I think about Swampy and how we have carved big scars into the landscape. Eventually the road building schemes were stopped with the plan to use what we have better. There are a few roads that lost their parking so other people can drive through quicker, others were closed or made one way to make the main roads quicker. Some of those roads will now be quieter, other will be much the same, If the sole purpose of making Cranbrook Road a one way was to reduce traffic it has failed badly. For most residents it already was a one way as there very little space to turn round so you normally exited the opposite end to where you entered, I would often drive round at night so I was facing the way I wanted to go in the morning, the only difference now is my car is always facing the same direction.  Although we lost that choice we gained not losing wingmirrors and getting our cars scratched. I no longer have to reverse the length of the road because other people cannot decide who should reverse. But those gains are the reason the road is busier, knowing there is no traffic in the opposite direction, knowing they will not get stuck, it now means I can tell when the lights change on the High Road and there are quite a few drivers who sound like they are hitting 30-40 mph. So now we have a new era for our roads, automated electric cars and 48t trucks, they don’t mix with cyclists or pedestrians. Personally I would have got rid of the trucks and copied the Exhibition Road scheme in Devonshire Road, Turnham Green Terrace and the High Road rather than fight over who gets which bit of the available space. Before deciding what it should look like now and complaining it’s not the same as before, we should probably be thinking what is going to happen next. With the government about to lose all the fuel duty as everyone switches to electric cars and cycling, how will they replace the income?  Per Mile Charging appears to be the best answer. They could go back to Sir Abercrombie’s plan and introduce Trunk Road Charging, but how would they stop people from using other roads? Is it possible to close or police every side road? They could get everyone to download an app, so they know where everyone is and track them, but I can think of 37 billion reasons why that won’t work!? With the CC and the ULEZ being zonal it is more likely PMC in London will also be zonal rather than per mile. Saving Chiswick from being part of a zonal area might be a better way to promote some of these schemes. To introduce TRC they would have to close or restrict access to and from the main roads in Chiswick so the local roads could remain free or cheaper. If they cannot restrict access, they would have to include Chiswick as part of a zone so you have to pay to use every road, but could use all of the road network (width and height permitting). With Chiswick High Road an alternative to the A4, do you charge everyone for using it? or do you slow it down so much it’s no longer a viable route and remains free to drive along?

Colin Potter ● 1906d